Pre-carved Niches: The Formation Dynamics of Modular Task Partitions in Early LLM Training

Large language models exhibit a modular internal organization that mirrors well-studied functional networks of the human brain, but how this organization forms during training is unknown: prior work has characterized finished models, not the formation process. We track formation step by step: we train a Pythia-410M model from scratch (two trajectories, bf16 and fp32) and run attribution patching at every step, alongside probes for gradient norms, effective updates, weight norms, and first-order loss decomposition across 14 tasks in four cognitive domains. Three findings. First, the modular map is pre-carved: before any learning, the dominant task pair already overlaps at ~3.6x the attribution substrate (a task-independent baseline), and its layer-0 concentration is an architecture-level constant on this model family. Second, the partition locks in through two sharp jumps whose amplitudes do not track the learning-rate schedule (the second reaching 20.4 sigma quiet-window / 6.2 sigma global), accompanied by gradient-level relative deprivation--winners receive 2.25->2.73x the loser's gradient supply, 9.5-11.5 standard deviations below a random control--that does not propagate to updates or weights. Third, deviation from the substrate appears only in the domain being learned, consistent with the hypothesis that modularity tracks learning. We close by separating the feature-level account we can defend from the mechanistic questions we cannot, and we pre-register the scale-threshold hypothesis behind our ongoing 2.8B experiments.

Decodable But Not Detachable: Training Data Granularity Determines Parametric Modularity in Large Language Models

Do large language models contain domain-specific parametric shells: concentrated, causally necessary neuron populations whose removal selectively degrades a target domain while sparing others? We apply a uniform causal methodology across two domain granularities, three model families (1.5B to 7B parameters), and eight domains. At the academic subject level, zero neurons exceed 60\% domain selectivity across 939,008 combined FFN neurons and causal damage matrices are flat, despite domain identity being linearly decodable above 85\% accuracy. At the language and modality level, 0.65--1.14\% of neurons exceed 60\% selectivity, damage matrices are near-perfectly diagonal (ratios up to 595:1), and shell neuron sets are essentially disjoint (IoU $< 0.003$). Masking code-selective neurons reduces mathematical reasoning accuracy by 16--24 percentage points across all models; masking Spanish or Chinese neurons leaves it at or below random. Shell strength increases monotonically with scale and shells are spatially interleaved in a pattern that precludes group-level selective quantization. Parametric shells form where and only where training data was modular at the token level.

Modular Cognitive Architecture Emerges in Large Language Models

The human brain exhibits a striking degree of functional specialization, with distinct networks supporting language, formal reasoning, reasoning about other minds, and reasoning about the physical world. Is this modular organization a fundamental principle of how intelligent systems must be built, or an evolutionary accident specific to biological brains? Here, we test whether a similar organization emerges in Large Language Models--another class of intelligent systems created through a very different optimization process. Using circuit analyses across N=46 tasks spanning four cognitive domains (language, formal reasoning, social reasoning, physical reasoning), we find that LLMs develop a modular architecture that mirrors the human brain: tasks drawing on the same network in humans recruit overlapping neurons in LLMs, whereas tasks drawing on different networks recruit distinct neurons. The convergent emergence of modularity in brains and neural networks suggests that it may be a fundamental property of intelligent systems.

How Modular Is a Frontier Mixture-of-Experts? A Pre-registered Causal Test in Which Apparent Expert Modularity Mostly Dissolves

Sparse Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) models route each token to a few of many experts, inviting the hypothesis that experts form functional modules tied to capabilities or languages. We test this causally on Command A+, a frontier open-weights MoE (218B total / 25B active; 128 experts, 8 active, +1 shared). We build a routing-mass atlas, pre-register six family-to-axis hypotheses before any intervention, and ablate each family at inference time against a size-matched random-expert null, measuring whether it selectively breaks its own axis (worst off-target effect at most one third of on-target). Crucially, we test the same families under four metrics and a held-out, independent-corpus run with bootstrap confidence intervals. Our finding is cautionary: robust functional modularity is rare and measurement-dependent. Of six pre-registered families, only one, the Arabic-language family, is a clean selective module that survives an independent corpus and a conservative statistical bar (1/6; a more permissive pre-registered point rule admits 3/6, but that count is threshold-sensitive). Every other family has a real causal effect yet fails selectivity, and its apparent modularity flips with the measurement: with the corpus, the metric, and the statistical bar. A positive control on Qwen3-30B-A3B recovers its published disjoint structure, confirming the method detects modularity when present. The verdict reproduces on the un-quantized BF16 model, ruling out a 4-bit quantization artifact. We conclude that ablation-based modularity verdicts are not safe unless the corpus, metric, and statistical bar are controlled. We release the atlas and ablation data.